Wednesday, November 17, 2004

Preoccupation and Politics

So I've been very preoccupied this week--I apologize for leaving you all hanging, but hope you all took a second to check out Uncle Orson's site. I love it, have I mentioned that?? Here's one of those random posts of the political happenings I'm following. It's not as interesting as my little historical rants or philosophies, but it's news (however late it may be):

Colin Powell Resigns; Rice Appointed:

This liberal thinks this is a great move for both sides of the isle. Judging by the outcome of this November's election we all know that it will take a great deal of reorganization for the Democratic Party if they plan on ever getting back into the White House. With Powell stepping down as Sec. of State, there is a good chance he could run in 2008-- obviously as a Republican, but he's very moderate. A good choice for both parties. AND, Condie Rice is one of the smartest, if not the smartest, women in the world. Though she tends to side with and support Cheney, this is a grand slam for the Republican party (we'll see what it does to the African-American vote) and for the Bush administration. No matter what party, having a decisive and consistent State Dept. is serious business. Not that Powell did a poor job, but if you want countries to respect your president, you can't send an ambassador/diplomat who doesn't necessarily agree with him.

By way of cabinet changes, this one didn't really surprise me. We all saw it coming at some point. The other new resignations-- Veneman, Abrams, Paige...nothing too surprising. I'm sad to say it would be a step up for the Dept. of Education to have a new leader even though we need a lot of consistency if we ever want to see No Child Left Behind succeed. But you just can't expect that from a guy who referred to the NEA as a terrorist organization. In the coming weeks we'll most likely see Ridge and Thompson depart. Oh how I wish for Rumsfeld to surprise me, but for now he'll be around a while.

Don't Make Rules You'll Have to Break:

This is certainly not Fox least it isn't "fair & balanced." It goes without saying that I don't like Tom DeLay. Never have, probably never will. But I do find it very ironic that the Grand Ole Party made the rule that those indicted for criminal acts could not hold House leadership effort to defeat the attempts of the Dems to regain control of the House...and now they're changing the rule because their own beloved Tom DeLay has broken the rule. Political corruption is political corruption. Then again if political corruption were a "burned-at-the-stake" offense, we wouldn't have any politicians.

If you really want to know my opinion...I'm going to tell you even if you don't-- I think DeLay needs to go the way of Trent Lott, bye-bye. If only we could get DeLay to say something as tactful as Lott did at Strom Thurmond's birthday party, we'd really be in business. Stating your opinion about segregation gets you axed, but committing a criminal offense gets you party support and new rules-- What a Grand Ole Party it is!


Nick Speth said...

I'm not sure the Rice thing is a grand slam, maybe a stand-up RBI double (ahh, baseball analogies). I mean, we've had an African-American Secretary of State for the last 4 years, and Bush increased his percentage of the black vote only a few points. As far as having a State department that actually agrees with American foriegn policy. Yeah, that'll be good.

Aside: never thought you'd have the same opinion as the Wall Street Journal (sorta):

On DeLay. I agree. I wouldn't have wanted the rule in place to begin with (aren't we innocent until proven guilty), but since it's there, and Republicans put it there, they ought to walk the walk, if you follow me. From what I hear from various analysts, DeLay will likely be cleared, but until then, let's follow the rules.

Nick Speth said...

Looks like I was right. DeLay is not going to be indicted let alone convicted of anything. The following link is from CBS News, so take it with a hefty dose of skepticism (ha ha).